Here's what has been happening with voter ID legislation in the states, as more states recognize the importance of this important protection of election integrity or seek to improve their existing laws to ensure that every eligible voter is able to vote while protecting the votes of all eligible voters.
Iowa: Contentious voter ID bill gets final OK; heads to Branstad
The
Iowa Senate gave final approval Thursday to contentious legislation that will
require voters to show government-issued identification at the polls . . . .
House
File 516 passed on a 28-21 vote with Republicans casting all the yes votes.
Democrats and one independent all voted no. The bill now heads to Gov. Terry
Branstad, who is expected to sign it.
Nebraska: Resolution to require voter ID at Nebraska's polls advances but is expected to stir debate among lawmakers
The
Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee voted 6-2 to advance to the
floor Legislative Resolution 1CA, which asks Nebraskans whether they want to
put a photo ID requirement in the state constitution.
If
adopted by the full Legislature, ballot language on the constitutional
amendment would appear before voters in November 2018. If voters approve the
amendment it will be left to state lawmakers to pass legislation spelling out
what constitutes an acceptable ID and whether the state will pay for IDs for
those who cannot afford them.
North Dakota: North Dakota attempting to fix voter ID rules after lawsuit
After altering voter identification laws in
previous legislative sessions, North Dakota's Republican-led Legislature now is
attempting to fix them after a group of American Indians sued in federal court,
alleging the state requirements are unconstitutional and disenfranchised tribal
members.
The House passed a bill Monday that allows
those who don't have proper ID to cast a ballot that's set aside until the
voter's eligibility is confirmed. The Senate still must agree to the measure
before it goes to GOP Gov. Doug Burgum for his signature.
Texas: House committee approves bill to make changes to voter ID law
The House Elections Committee on Monday
approved a bill that would make court-ordered changes to the state’s
controversial voter identification law, moving the proposal to the House floor
under the looming specter of federal action.
Senate Bill 5, written by Rep. Joan Huffman,
R-Houston, would give more leeway to people who show up to the polls without
one of seven state-approved photo IDs. They would be allowed to use other
documents that carry their name and address as proof of identity, such as a
utility bill, if they sign a "declaration of impediment" stating why
they don't have an approved ID.
If you'd like to receive a weekly email with the week's voter ID and mandatory voter registration news, sign up for Lawyers Democracy Fund's update here.
Today, two Democratic senators announced support not only for a vote for cloture on Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court but also for his confirmation.
Senator Joe Manchin from West Virginia said:
After considering his record, watching his testimony in front of the Judiciary Committee and meeting with him twice, I will vote to confirm him to be the ninth justice on the Supreme Court. . . . Throughout Judge Gorsuch’s career, he has come to his legal rulings objectively, through the letter of the law rather than through his own opinion.
During his time on the bench Judge Gorsuch has received praise from his colleagues who have been appointed by both Democrats and Republicans. He has been consistently rated as a well-qualified jurist, the highest rating a jurist can receive, and I have found him to be an honest and thoughtful man. I hold no illusions that I will agree with every decision Judge Gorsuch may issue in the future, but I have not found any reasons why this jurist should not be a Supreme Court Justice.
Senator Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota said:
After doing my due diligence by meeting with Judge Gorsuch and reviewing his record and testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I've decided to vote in favor of his confirmation. He has a record as a balanced, meticulous, and well respected jurist who understands the rule of law. He has unique and critical experience with tribal sovereignty, Indian law, and public lands issues in the west, and has received the endorsement of numerous tribes and major Native American organizations. During our meeting and at his hearing, he reinforced the importance of a judiciary that remains independent of the executive and legislative branches of government - and that acts as a proper check and balance on the other two branches of government.
Other Democratic senators demonstrated some further cracks in the hardline Trump resistance movement today. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri recognized that the Democrats' gridlock strategy for the Supreme Court is likely to backfire, and Senator Ben Cardin said that the Democrats should not filibuster Gorsuch.
Senators Heitkamp and Manchin are up for reelection in 2018 in states that voted for Donald Trump in 2016, and perhaps these senators have recognized the political consequences of voting against an eminently qualified judge like Judge Gorsuch. Perhaps they have decided to listen to their constituents instead of the radical progressive special interest groups that increasingly control the Democratic Party. Or perhaps, tellingly, they considered his extensive judicial record and made their decision on that basis, unlike their Democratic colleagues who have not bothered to review his record.
Whatever the reason, we applaud Senators Heitkamp and Manchin for questioning the blind obstruction of the current Democratic Party and for supporting an extremely well-qualified and well-respected nominee for the Supreme Court.
